Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

🇺🇸🇮🇷🇨🇳 China did what the Gulf’s traditional security architecture couldn’t... While missiles flew and the Strait of Hormuz stayed under pressure, Beijing quietly cut oil imports by 3–5 million barrels a day and tapped its own reserves. The result: oil prices never fully delivered the $100–$120 shock many had...

72,033 views • 19 days ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

CHINA WEAPONIZES THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ: THE 1.4 BILLION BARREL DEMAND STRIKE SET TO CRUSH OIL PRICES Troy W. Eckard of Eckard Enterprises has spent 41 years inside the oil and gas industry. He now reveals how the Strait of Hormuz has become a Bermuda Triangle of daily uncertainty and how China is weaponizing that chaos from the demand side in a way never seen before. What he describes next explains why oil prices may behave so differently in the months ahead. THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE OPENS THE DOOR ➡️ The Strait of Hormuz now operates like the Bermuda Triangle where vessels and 20,000 mariners never know from one day to the next whether safe passage exists. ➡️ This constant uncertainty created the perfect opening for a new kind of energy power play. THE CHINA DEMAND WEAPON ➡️ For the last 45 days China stopped buying 6 to 7 million barrels per day in the open market. ➡️ Instead Beijing is draining its 1.4 billion barrel strategic reserves to create intentional demand destruction. ➡️ Eckard states clearly this is worse than normal demand destruction because it is completely intentional and calculated. ➡️ The result could push oil prices into the low 70s, the 60s, or even the $50 range. THE PRODUCER SQUEEZE ➡️ Crushed prices force companies worldwide to slash capital spending and delay new drilling projects. ➡️ China simply waits to refill its own storage at the lowest prices once producers capitulate. ➡️ This demand swing tactic has never appeared in Eckard’s four decade career. THE 180 DAY POWER PLAY ➡️ China consumes 11.5 to 11.7 million barrels daily yet produces only 4.5 million barrels at home. ➡️ Its reserves give Beijing the ability to halt all imports for roughly 180 days if required. ➡️ No supply swing player has ever held this level of demand side leverage until now. THE BOTTOM LINE China has turned Strait of Hormuz uncertainty into a powerful demand weapon that lets them crush prices today and quietly restock tomorrow at everyone else’s expense. This is the sound of a new energy order being born where demand manipulation becomes the ultimate strategic tool. HT: YouTube Eckard Enterprises | Oil & Gas Investing #ChinaOilWeapon #HormuzBermudaTriangle #IntentionalDemandDestruction #OilPriceManipulation #EnergyGeopolitics #StraitOfHormuz #ChinaReserves

Mark

47,024 views • 2 months ago

🚨BREAKING: UAE🇦🇪 EXITS OPEC AND OPEC+, OPEC LOSES ITS THIRD LARGEST PRODUCER The UAE announced its withdrawal from OPEC after more than five decades, effective on the 1st of May. The UAE is a founding member, having joined in 1967, four years before the UAE itself was established. The UAE said the move reflects its national interest and its role in meeting market needs at a time when the Strait of Hormuz crisis has disrupted energy flows and kept oil prices elevated, and forecasted higher energy demand in the future. The UAE has ambitions to increase production from 3.4 million barrels per day to five million by 2027, which OPEC quotas would have constrained. The UAE’s decision to leave OPEC and OPEC+ is a fundamental reordering of the global energy market, and a further shift towards multipolarity, with the UAE positioning itself to be at the forefront of meeting rising global energy demand. OPEC has long declined in its geopolitical power, and the UAE has decided to forge its own path with having no limits on increasing production, as the world reels from the energy shock unleashed by the Trump-Netanyahu war of aggression against Iran. The UAE is not the first in the GCC to leave OPEC, with Qatar leaving in 2019. The propaganda headlines you’ll be seeing of a UAE-Saudi conflict over the decision will likely amount to hot air. There will inevitably be short-term energy price instability, but countries around the world will rush to secure deals with the UAE to offset a major economic crisis caused by the war on Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The international institutions of old are increasingly irrelevant, and OPEC is widely seen as the organisation of yesterday. The future will likely involve energy institutions and mechanisms within BRICS, to facilitate stable energy prices in a multipolar world. The UAE’s exit from OPEC is just one step closer in that direction. With China and the global south set to drive economic growth this century, the UAE is now well-positioned to benefit from multipolarity, free of production caps, as long-term energy demand will continue climbing, as the nations of the global south develop their economies and increase living standards for their people. My live segment on RT

Afshin Rattansi

18,021 views • 4 months ago

The Oil Shock Is Hitting A Supply Chain Already Rewired Under Stress The real danger here is hat the global economy is entering the worst energy shock of our lifetimes after already spending the last year rewiring trade under tariff pressure, China decoupling, front loaded inventories, and longer supply routes. That matters because fragility rarely comes from one shock. It comes when one shock lands on top of a system that already had its buffers removed. The China Trade Collapse The China trade collapse is real. Census data shows U.S. goods imports from China fell from $438.7 billion in 2024 to $308.4 billion in 2025, a decline of almost 30%. U.S. exports to China fell from $143.2 billion to $106.3 billion, and the bilateral goods deficit dropped to $202.1 billion, the lowest level in years. That is not a blip. That is structural decoupling. But the key nuance is that global trade did not collapse with it. UNCTAD says global trade still grew about 7.5% in 2025 to a record $35 trillion, while BEA data shows total U.S. imports rose 4.8% and the overall trade deficit barely moved, falling only 0.2% to $901.5 billion. The Rerouting Illusion That means the world did not stop trading. It rerouted. China was partly replaced by Mexico, Vietnam, India, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, and other nodes. On paper, that looks like resilience. In reality, it also means more complexity, more shipping dependence, more customs friction, more insurance risk, more working capital tied up in inventory, and more fuel burned per unit of goods moved. The supply chain survived the tariff shock by becoming less efficient. Now Place An Oil Shock On Top Of That The IEA says global observed oil inventories fell by 85 million barrels in March, while stocks outside the Middle East Gulf fell by 205 million barrels as Hormuz flows were choked off. It also said oil export losses now exceed 13 million barrels per day, with cumulative supply losses of more than 360 million barrels in March and 440 million projected for April. The peak daily supply loss is already above 12 million barrels per day, larger than the 1973 Arab oil embargo at roughly 4.5 million barrels per day and the 1978 to 1979 Iranian Revolution at roughly 5.6 million. The Inventory Signal The chart is showing the physical cushion disappearing. Once inventories fall fast enough, price stops being the only rationing mechanism. The system starts rationing through behavior, policy, and scarcity. Airlines cut routes. Truckers pass through diesel costs. Food prices rise. Fertilizer gets tighter. Refineries prioritize. Governments release reserves. Then come pressure campaigns, fuel allocation, export controls, industrial curtailments, remote work mandates, speed limits, and priority access for military, emergency services, farming, and food logistics. What An Energy Lockdown Would Actually Look Like That is what an energy lockdown would look like. Not necessarily COVID style house arrest, but a forced reduction in mobility because the fuel system cannot support normal economic life at normal prices. The 1970s gave us gas lines, odd even rationing, Sunday station closures, and a 55 mph speed limit. Today’s version would be more technocratic, more targeted, and probably sold as temporary conservation. But the logic is the same. When energy is scarce, freedom of movement becomes a policy variable. My Take The oil shock is bad enough by itself. The real danger is that it is hitting a trade system already made more fragile by tariffs and China decoupling. Trade did not collapse in 2025. It rerouted. But rerouted trade depends on cheap, available fuel. If Hormuz stays disrupted, this becomes an inflation, logistics, food, credit, and political stability shock. The market is focused on the price of oil, but the real warning is the inventory draw. Once the spare barrels are gone, energy stops being managed by markets alone and starts being managed by allocation.

EndGame Macro

41,818 views • 4 months ago

Washington is Furious as China Moves Into Latin America ▶️ Watch the full video: 🔹China signals a strategic shift, not a routine update: Beijing’s new policy paper on Latin America and the Caribbean—its first major revision since 2016—frames the region as central to a changing global order, reflecting a more fragmented world and an open U.S.–China rivalry that challenges long-standing U.S. dominance under the Monroe Doctrine. 🔹Latin America positioned as part of the “Global South”: China explicitly casts the region as a political and strategic force in building a multipolar world, emphasizing a “community with a shared future,” opposition to hegemony, and the idea that the old, U.S.-led system is fading. 🔹Political alignment over ideology: Beijing stresses support for the One China principle, especially on Taiwan, while offering mutual backing on sovereignty. It seeks broad engagement not just with governments, but with legislatures, institutions, and political parties across the ideological spectrum, prioritizing long-term influence over ideological conformity. 🔹Economic sovereignty and de-dollarization: Beyond infrastructure and the Belt and Road Initiative, China is pushing reduced reliance on the U.S. dollar through local-currency trade, currency swaps, deeper central bank cooperation, and expanded Chinese financial institutions—laying groundwork for a parallel financial ecosystem. 🔹Expanding security and strategic ties: The roadmap includes deeper defense and security cooperation—military exchanges, training, disaster relief, counter-terrorism, and peacekeeping—framed under China’s Global Security Initiative as an alternative to U.S.-led security frameworks, signaling China’s ambition to be both an economic and security partner in the region.

Lena Petrova

26,281 views • 8 months ago

The U.S. is almost certainly the cleanest shirt in the laundry because it produces enormous amounts of oil and gas while the economies most dependent on Hormuz are overwhelmingly in Asia. But cleanest does not mean clean. Even in an extreme scenario where a prolonged energy and financial shock contributed to something approaching Great Depression scale economic damage, the U.S. could still emerge relatively stronger if its principal competitors suffered even greater destruction to their energy security, industrial capacity, financial systems and ability to project power. American households and businesses would suffer enormously, but U.S. energy production, food security, geography, capital markets and control over dollar liquidity provide shock absorbers many competitors simply do not possess. And that is the uncomfortable geopolitical question I keep coming back to. Great powers do not necessarily optimize for avoiding every domestic recession if policymakers believe the alternative is losing their position in the international order. If Washington concluded that a severe but survivable contraction at home would permanently weaken China more, fracture competing resource networks and leave the U.S. controlling a larger relative share of global financial, technological and energy power afterward, would it tolerate extraordinary domestic economic pain to preserve American primacy? I am not saying that is demonstrably the strategy. But in a genuine great power struggle, the relevant calculation may eventually become relative survivability rather than absolute prosperity.

EndGame Macro

51,399 views • 1 month ago